.... not to mention when the Evo's do hit the showroom floor, your LBS will be much more willing to negotiate a deal on their Hi-Mods.

Seems like they're substantially different bikes. Maybe the better comparison is the Scott Addict.

In any case, if you're value-minded, go down to the CAAD10.

added: I just saw BikeRumor says the frame has an EPS core. Very cool. We'd been conjecturing that R5-CA might have used aerogel, but it turned out to not be true. Cannondale seems to have taken a similar path, however.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

Doubtful.

Cannondale has sold of most bikes for the remainder of the 2011 model year for some time now. There will be next to no Cannondale's on most dealer floors when the Evo hits the market.

_________________
- Zipp rims will break if you look at them too hard
- R-Sys wheels will spontaneously explode
- The ZG crankset will never, ever exist
- Everyone needs Lightweights, even if they're fat and old
- Parts actually made of metal are SO 10 years ago

I agree; I tried to order the 11 jekyll, but was told that I will have to wait for the 12 version.
It seems either 1) the demand for Cannondale bikes has gone way up, and/or 2) the production level is subpar ever since they
moved their manufacturing overseas.

The EVO looks like a beautiful bike, I can't wait to see one in person.
As far as Cannondale's availability, they've always been very careful to keep their production levels low, basically only making a few bikes more than dealers preseason order. When the frames were all made in the US, that wasn't much of an issue, since they could basically continually make frames with about a 3-6 week lead time (for delivery in the US, I can't speak to international markets). When they moved all their production to Taiwan, the lead time increased significantly; as a result, they can't just ramp up production as demand increases.
This actually has a pretty healthy result for Cannondale and it's dealers. Since Cannondale has little to no inventory, they don't have to worry about putting things on closeout. And dealers, in turn, know that they are going to make their full margin on a bike, without discounting. The only people it really hurts are consumers who are always "looking for a deal." I could go off on more of a rant about that...but I'm already pretty OT.
I'm going to order a EVO frameset, and hope for delivery some time this fall. I suggest anyone else who wants one do the same!

_________________
My Rides:
2011 S3 Sram Red/808's/Zipp SLC2/Romin Pro
2009 SWorks Epic/Handbuilt wheels (by me)/Marta SL magnesiums/ XTR drivetrain
2008 Ellsworth Moment/ Handbuilt wheels (by me)/ Marta SL/ X0 (9spd) drivetrain

K.P.A.

This, I know for a fact, is true.

In late 07, my Six-13 broke. Cannondale was no longer making Six-13's with BB30, so they offered me a System 6 as a replacement. Since it was late in the year, I got to choose whether I wanted an 07 or 08 paint job - I went with the 07 raw aluminum/carbon version.

It took about six weeks for the frame to arrive as they had to make it for me. In fact, the warranty tag had the manufacture date on it, which was just a couple weeks before it arrived.

As for the Evo, I'm intrigued by the change in fork crown diameter. I wonder why they went from forks with a 1 1/2 to 1 1/8 steer tube to 1 1/4 to 1 1/8.

I have both the System 6, with the massive 1 1/2 crown, and a Caad 9 with the 1 1/8, and I can definitely notice a difference in front end stiffness between the two.

Why the headset size change? Cannondale says it allows them to decrease frontal area, thereby decreasing aero drag. I would guess that the 1.5" headset lower bearing was putting too much force into the downtube. The engineers had a choice: maintain the 1.5" bearing and over build the downtube to account for those forces, or use a smaller bearing to decrease he loads sent to the downtube. Just my guess though.

_________________
My Rides:
2011 S3 Sram Red/808's/Zipp SLC2/Romin Pro
2009 SWorks Epic/Handbuilt wheels (by me)/Marta SL magnesiums/ XTR drivetrain
2008 Ellsworth Moment/ Handbuilt wheels (by me)/ Marta SL/ X0 (9spd) drivetrain

K.P.A.

Cervélo decided more or less the same thing with the R5.

"Cervélo believe some of their competitors have gone too far when it comes to front end stiffness. Their testing concluded that a 1-1/2in (1.5in) head tube bearing was too big, reducing comfort and increasing transmission of frontal impact energy, requiring more material be added to the frame. “It’s another one of those optimals,” said White. “There’s something in the middle that makes sense; we went with the lowest weight option with the highest performance.”

In the end Cervélo settled on a 1-1/4in to 1-3/8in tapered head tube. They say it gives the added stiffness and carbon moulding benefits that a taper can offer, without negatively affecting comfort, impact absorption or requiring more material to be added to the frame to support it. Cervélo partnered with German manufacturers THM to co-develop the R5’s tapered fork."

Smaller usually = lighter, right ?

Especially if some of the smaller parts are made of steel (i am referring to the bearings)

IMO, Cannondale elected to downsize the bottom bearing diameter based on results from the CAAD10. I have put many miles on my friend's SS, and I own a CAAD10, and I can say I find no difference (note - I said "I") in front end stiffness or control including curving down hill reaching speeds in the mid-40s mph. My NEO has the larger diameter, and again I can tell no difference.

In the end, Cannondale saves on material costs and reduces weight plus wind drag at seemingly no penalty ... works for me

Actually, the reason why an engineer would specify a 1 1/4 is to have a smoother transition from the steerer tube to the fork crown and the fork blades. With a composite fork you want to have as smooth a transition as possible and no extreme angles such as the 90º required to press on a headset crown race/base plate. Otherwise, such as the case with a 1 1/8" lower headset bearing, it would require even more material to absorb the forces involved with hard bumps and braking and that would otherwise disadvantageously affect the weight of the fork.

1 1/2" lower headsets are good for, say, freeride mountainbikes or other bikes that get hammered, but for a road bike it's wholly unnecessary. I find what Denk did is strike a nice balance between engineering, weight, aerodynamics and what works within the available present-day lower headset standards. Stiffness is not really a matter of size because of the anisotropic nature of carbonfiber. That's my view, anyway...

Just saw on Cannondale's site that they've moved the 2012 supersix's over to SRAM Pressfit 30 which they are now calling SRAM Pressfit BB30. Is it a different system then the previous Pressfit 30?

A bearing being held by plastic being dropped into a carbon frame doesn't sound like a good solution.

Cervelo also says 1.5" headset bearings are overkill.

Now both Cervelo and Cannondale are refusing to buy into the "more is always better" dogma. I also really like that Cannondale is taking the position that aerodynamics matters even if you're not designing a bike for which it is the primary design consideration.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

Yes, I admire the current position they are taking concerning aerodynamics. It's one thing to consider, but the only thing.

EDIT:
but *not* the only thing..

Ok. I'm quitting for day.

_________________
Buy it. & Ride it.
Only if it has a high margin of utility.

Why

Is it just the sound the words make together or do you have a sound reason to base that on?

Seems to me a very well thought out bike.
A little stiff in the seatpost-chainstay-toptube junction relative the bb perhaps?

/a

_________________
Technical Artisans